You cannot understand international law. Targeting military assets is not against international law, placing them near civilians assets is. You should try reading laws before you sign up to them.

Click to expand...

What is difference, between nuking of Hiroshima in 1945 - city almost without military targets, and blasting of Beirut barracks of Marines (military target) in 1983?

If you want to know something about laws, you should remember, that any crime (or any action) have:
- subject (who did it),
- object (what was affected),
- subjective side (what was in the head of man),
- objective side (what was in reality).

For terracts there are:
1. Subject - individual, or non-government organisation.
2. Object - peaceful individuals or legitime militaries, or members of another goverment organisation.
3. Subjective side - criminal should wanting to scary enemies.
4. Objective side - death or injuring.

If your bomber was soldier or another goverment worker and make it becouse of strict order - it was not a terract - it was an act of war.
If victims were not humans it was not a terract.
If he kill them not for scary other, but, for example, just in business goals - it was not a terract.
If in reality there were not victims - it was not a terract.

British soldier, who work with his orders - can not be "terrorist" just becouse of definition.
So and Hesbollah can not be terrorists, becouse they are part of Lebanon officials.

Ok, bro, I understand, that it is too difficult for your small and untrained British brains, so - "Hesbollah are not terrorists, becouse Russia don't recognise them as terrorists." Is it clear enough?

What is difference, between nuking of Hiroshima in 1945 - city almost without military targets, and blasting of Beirut barracks of Marines (military target) in 1983?

If you want to know something about laws, you should remember, that any crime (or any action) have:
- subject (who did it),
- object (what was affected),
- subjective side (what was in the head of man),
- objective side (what was in reality).

For terracts there are:
1. Subject - individual, or non-government organisation.
2. Object - peaceful individuals or legitime militaries, or members of another goverment organisation.
3. Subjective side - criminal should wanting to scary enemies.
4. Objective side - death or injuring.

If your bomber was soldier or another goverment worker and make it becouse of strict order - it was not a terract - it was an act of war.
If victims were not humans it was not a terract.
If he kill them not for scary other, but, for example, just in business goals - it was not a terract.
If in reality there were not victims - it was not a terract.

British soldier, who work with his orders - can not be "terrorist" just becouse of definition.
So and Hesbollah can not be terrorists, becouse they are part of Lebanon officials.

Ok, bro, I understand, that it is too difficult for your small and untrained British brains, so - "Hesbollah are not terrorists, becouse Russia don't recognise them as terrorists." Is it clear enough?

Click to expand...

Easy, bombing Hiroshima saved millions of lives, both Allied and Japanese, both military and civilians. Blasting Beirut barracks achieved nothing. And trying to establish militant Islamic groups as non-terrorists is a policy long dead in the water.

Easy, bombing Hiroshima saved millions of lives, both Allied and Japanese, both military and civilians. Blasting Beirut barracks achieved nothing. And trying to establish militant Islamic groups as non-terrorists is a policy long dead in the water.

Click to expand...

It is very subjective point of view.
There are opinion, that Japan was surrender not becouse nuking, but becouse crushing of Quantun Army by Soviet Army, and this bombing was useless from military point of view.
There are also strong opinion, that exit of French and US soldiers from Lebanon in 1984 was also motivated by blasting of their barracks in 1983.

And you quote an American music video. You have good taste in music but...

Click to expand...

"The difference between gods and daemons largely depends upon where one is standing at the time.", as Lorgar said.

I'm not very familiar with modern West "culture" (including this movie), one of reasons - such revision of Greek Myths (and Old European culture at all) is unacceptable for me.
Watch "Mahabharata" if you want to know what is really good epic movie.

It is very subjective point of view.
There are opinion, that Japan was surrender not becouse nuking, but becouse crushing of Quantun Army of Soviet Army, and this bombing was useless from military point of view.
There are also strong opinion, that exit of French and US soldiers from Lebanon in 1984 was also motivated by blasting of their barracks in 1983.

Click to expand...

Garbage. The Japanese surrender coincides exactly with the A-bombing.

And what about all the attacks on civilians Hezbollah have committed. And parts of their territory remain occupied because they couldn't be civil.

Some people say Taliban attacks made the Soviets leave Afghanistan, but that doesn't mean they're not terrorists.

"The difference between gods and daemons largely depends upon where one is standing at the time.", as Lorgar said.

I'm not very familiar with modern West "culture" (including this movie), one of reasons - such revision of Greek Myths (and Old European culture at all) is unacceptable for me.
Watch "Mahabharata" if you want to know what is really good epic movie.

Sure. But one thing if there are some little differences between text and movie (as in adaptation of Mahabharata) and when common are only few names - all other are absolutely different. As for me it is blatant disrespect to forefathers.

Feb-Aug of 1945 - 67 of largest Japan cities were "foobared", more that 40% of total cities squares were grounded to zero level. More that 300,000 of civilians were killed, more that 750,000 injured. Many millions have lost houses. Japans continue fighting.
Aug, 4 - bombing of Hiroshima, Japans continue fighting.
Aug, 9 - bombing of Nagasaki, start of Russian assault - Japans continue fighting,
To Aug. 14 - Quantun Army's defence was crushed, Soviet Army had captured many important cities in Manchjuria.
Aug, 14 - order for capitulation for Japan Army,
Aug, 15 - Message for Japan people by Imperialistic Hirohito,
Sep, 2 - Signing of Act of capitulation.

Japans can fight without main cities, with chance to have a good peace. Japans can not fight against both USA and Soviet Union.

But independently from what was a result of this bombing, they were not "terracts".

And what about all the attacks on civilians Hezbollah have committed. And parts of their territory remain occupied because they couldn't be civil.

Click to expand...

There are difference to be occupied by USA, France, Israel or Syria. USA and France were extraneous in this party. But independently from results of this bombing it were terracts.

Some people say Taliban attacks made the Soviets leave Afghanistan, but that doesn't mean they're not terrorists.

Talibs attacks Soveit Army (military targets) - and it were terracts (some times).
Question is not only in object (target) of action, question is also in subject (who makes action). Goverment forces can not be "terrorists". When British pilot kill German civilians - he is a "soldier", not "terrorist". When not-goverment civilian attack legitime soldiers - he is a terrorist.

I do not know how Hezbollah entered the game here,but...
(i) Hezbollah, is NOT a government. Even if you consider it as a political party, they are not endowed to use violence, which is a government privilege. There fore there acts cannot be considered as war acts. ( same was for IRA or ETA e.g.)
(ii) International laws bide governments towards certain behaviour during wars. Purposedly targeting civilians OR militaries from another country without a preliminary war declaration is considered as a crime.

Anw, DAESH is not recognized as a government by any other nation. Aka with international laws in view, all their violent acts are either war crimes or terrorist acts.

Again, there is no moral excuse in purposedly targeting kids.

Anw, in what Hiroshima is related? Read the after 1945 part of your own link ...

I do not know how Hezbollah entered the game here,but...
(i) Hezbollah, is NOT a government.

Click to expand...

Lebanon is a Parliament Republic, and "Coalition of Mar, 8" control 40% of Parliament. They are legal goverment forces in Lebanon, allowed by their laws.

Even if you consider it as a political party, they are not endowed to use violence, which is a government privilege.

Click to expand...

Lebanon laws allow them to use violence, and only this is matter.

There fore there acts cannot be considered as war acts. ( same was for IRA or ETA e.g.)

Click to expand...

May be it is not "war", but "conflict".

(ii) International laws bide governments towards certain behaviour during wars. Purposedly targeting civilians OR militaries from another country without a preliminary war declaration is considered as a crime.

Click to expand...

Really? And when were a declarations of war in British attack in Iraq, Syria, Serbia, on Malvines, etc...?

Anw, DAESH is not recognized as a government by any other nation. Aka with international laws in view, all their violent acts are either war crimes or terrorist acts.

Click to expand...

Sure. ISIS and FSA are not legitime subjects, and both of them are criminals, large part of their actions are terracts.

Again, there is no moral excuse in purposedly targeting kids.

Click to expand...

Why not? How many kids were killed by British and US forces? And yes, Ukraian Junta leader, "president" Petr Poroshenko, officially declared targeting kids as way to win a "war".